HIMANSHU SUBASH CHANDRA PANT Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions had filed to quash the First Information Report registered in Crime No.17 of 2019 against four persons namely, (1)Boris Ostrobrod, (2) Himanshu Subhash Chandra Pant, (3) Manikandan and (4) Rayar Anand. J. for the alleged offences under Ss. 120(B), 406, 407 and 420 of IPC. The impugned First Information Report has been taken up for investigation, based on the order passed under Sec. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. by the Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirupur.

(2.) The allegations made in the First Information Report are as below:

(3.) On deposit of the said amount in the bank account maintained by the defacto complainant, he will forward the original House Bill of Lading to the buyer and the same will be presented to Credo Trans Limited, who is the Russian representative of M/s MGH Logistics Private Limited and thereafter, the buyer shall take delivery of the goods. However, the buyer did not deposit the value of the goods Rs.79,75,160.00 in the defacto complainant's bank account at India. While so, he despatched the 2 nd consignment under invoice No.SAK/044/18-2019 dtd. 1/3/2019. M/s MGH Logistics Private Limited at Tuticorin received the consignment sent by the defacto complainant from Tirupur through a lorry. While the second consignment was in transit, the defacto complainant received a copy of the Master Bill of Lading in his e-mail. He realised that contrary to the instructions to M/s MGH Logistics Private Limited, its Russia representative Credo Trans Limited had delivered the first consignment to M/s Allison Garments Prodactions LLC. The consignment has been delivered to the buyer, without production of House Bill of Lading, which is the essential document for delivery of goods.